08/12/1993 (2)
j.
DCAB
DEVELOPMENT,CODE AD.JUSTMENT BOARD
DATE CJ 5!/J:z.,/9..3
27- //&3
, '
"
.1
,;,- ,'~~ f.',.,' "', '.; ,'" ,..t.,'...... "'~'~ '1.' ~,.I . 'i."". . ,'t' ".," ~. , , ~, .
rJ....
t J
"IJ~J _ .
I
'.....,/
MEETING AGENDA
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Thursday, August 12, 1993 - 1:00 p.m. - commission Meeting Room,
city Hall, 3rd floor - 112 South Osceola Avenue
Clearwater, Florida
To consider requests for variances of the Land Development Code:
I. Public Hearings
1. city of Clearwater for variances (1) of 42 inches to allow a
fence 72 inches in height where 30 inches in height is permitted;
(2) of 24 inches to allow a fence 72 inches in height where 48
inches in height is permitted at 1250 Holt Avenue, Sec 10-29-15,
M&B 13.02, zoned P/SP (Public/Semi- public). V 93-48
Action: Granted as requested subject to the following conditions:
1) This variance is based on the application for a variance and
documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the
applicant's request for a variance. Deviation from any of the
above documents submitted in support of the request for a variance
regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any
physical structure located on the site, will result in this
variance being null al]d of no effect; 2) landscaping shall be
installed in accordance with Sec. 42.26(8) of the Land Development
Code and 3) the requisite building perm2t shall be obtained within
six (6) months from the date of this public hearing.
2. city of Clearwater a variance of 42 inches to allow a fence 72
inches in height where 30 inches in height is permitted at 1190
Russell Street, See 10-29-15, M&B 12.02, zoned OS/R (Open Space/
Recreation). V 93-49
Action: Granted as requested subject to the following conditions:
1) This variance is based on the application for a variance and
documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the
applicant's request for a variance. Deviation from any of the
above documents submitted in support of the request for a variance
regarding the l.,ork to be done wi th regard to the si te or any
physical structure located on the si te, will resul t in this
variance being null and of no effect; 2) landscaping shall be
installed in accordance with Sec. 42.26(8) of the Land Development
Code and 3) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within
six (6) mOllths from the date of this public hearing.
3. Mark F. Donato & Tammy L. Nelson for variances (1) of 13.04 ft
to allow a structure 11.96 ft from a street right-of-way where 25
ft is required; (2) of 20 it to allow a minimum lot width of 50 it
where 70 ft is required at 1056 Commodore street, BuY Terrace & Bay
Terrace Addition, Blk A, Lot 5, zoned RS 8 (single Family Residen-
tial). V 93-50
DCAB l\ction
08/12/93
1
J"I"'~ ;. "( '.,. ./~"'''' " " . .+' . . ...." <I::''': .~ ~ .., . r.. ~ I; '.'. ,lr_1 "~. . ~ '.. ',. ~ :",0"".. .....,.". .~'. . '1(' .,.', '..
/....~ '.'.<
Action: Granted as requested subject to the following conditions:
1) This variance is based on the application for a variance and
documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the
applicant's request for a variance. Deviation from any of the
above documents submitted in support of the request for a variance
regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any
physical structure located on the site, will resul t in this
variance being null and of no effect and 2) the requisite building
permit shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of
this public hearing.
4. city of Clearwater for variances (1) of 2 ft to permit a 6 ft
high fence in setback area adjacent to street to which property is
not addressed; (2) of 21 ft to permit two basketball goals to be
located 14 ft from a street right-of-way, rather than the 35 ft
setback required at 1900 Gilbert street, part of Marymont Sub,
lying south of Airport Dr, zoned OS/R (Open Space/Recreation). V
93-51
Action: Granted as requested subject to the following conditions:
1) This variance is based on the application for a variance and
documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the
applicant's request for a variance. Deviation from any of the
above documents submitted in support of the request for a variance
regarding the work to be done with regard to the si te or any
physical structure located on the site, will resul t in this
(' variance being null and of no effect; 2) a gate shal..l.. be installed
-", in the fence facing Brandon Avenue; 3) landscaping shall be
installed in accordance with Sec. 42.26(8) of the Land Development
Code; and 4) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within
six (6) months from the date of this public hearing.
5. Robert M. Mayer & Patricia A. st. John for a variance Of 10.5
ft to permit a freestanding roof trellis to be located 14.5 ft from
a street right-of-way at 304 Magnolia Drive, Harbor Oaks Sub, part
of lot 97, and all of lot 99, zoned RS 6 (Single Family Residen-
tial). V 93-52
Action: Granted as requested subject to the following condi tions:
1) This variance is based on the application for a variance and
documents submitted by the applicant, inclUding maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the
applicant's request for a variance. Deviation from any of the
above documents submitted in support of the request for a variance
regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any
physical structure located on the site, will result in this
variance being null and of no effect,. 2) t11e proposed roof trellis
shall remain unenclosed,. 3) the owner of the property shall
maintain the existing fence and landscaping between the pool and
the property line and 4) the requisi te building permi t shall be
obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public
hearing.
'-.-/
DCAB Action
2
08/12/93
,>I';. ..... .' . .,' '~.' .', .,' . it' ',', .' ~. :.',: ". . '," ..', ,'j' .~f..', '/' "L'. ~ '1"".
~ ,
,
,
,IQ~
('-
.......
'-'I
6. starboard Tower Clipper Cove condo for a variance of 2 ft to
allow a 6 ft high fence where 4 ft in height is permitted within
the structural setback from which the property is not addressed at
400 Island Way, Starboard Tower Clipper Cove Condominium, zoned RM
28 (Multiple Family Residential). V 93-54
Action: Granted as requested subject to the following conditions:
1) This variance is based on the application for a variance and
documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the
applicant's request for a variance. Deviation from any of the
above documents submitted in support of the request for a variance
regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any
physical structure located on the site, will result in this
variance being null and of no effect; 2) the fence shall be
properly maintained in order to ensure the aesthetic quality of the
surrounding neighborhood and 3) the requisite building permit for
the fence along the northern perimeter of the pool shall be
obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public
hearing.
II. Approval of Minutes of July 22, 1993
Approved as submitted.
III. Board and staff Discussion
IV. Adjournment
Adjourned at 2:52 p.m.
DCAB Action
08/12/93
3
f"\,
'"
1>, ~,
~.'w
DEVELOPMENT CODE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
August 12, 1993
Members present:
Emma C, Whitney, Vice-Chairman
Otto Gans
Joyce E. Martin
Members absent:
Alex Pliska. Chairman (excused)
John B. Johnson (excused)
Also present:
Miles Lance, Assistant City Attorney (1: 12 p.m.)
Sandy Glatthorn. Senior Planner
Gwen J. Legters, Staff Assistant II
The meeting was called to order by the Vice-Chairman at 1 :00 p.m. in the Commission
Chambers of City Hall. She outlined the procedures and advised that anyone adversely
affected by any decision of the Development Code Adjustment Board may appeal the decision
to an Appeal Hearing Officer within two weeks, She noted Florida law requires any applicant
appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings to support the appeal.
In order to provide continuity, the items will be listed in agenda order although not necessarily
discussed in tha't order,
I, Public Hearings
,. City of Clearwater for variances (1) of 42 inches to allow a fence 72 inches
in height where 30 inches in height is permitted; (2) of 24 inches to allow a
fence 72 inches in heigh't where 48 inches in height is permitted at 1250 Holt
Avenue, See 10-29-15, M&B 13,02, zoned P/SP (Public/Semi- Public). V 93-48
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail stating the applicant wishes to
construct a six-foot fence to replace an existing five-foot high chain link fence along the north
and east sides of a basketball court at the Holt Avenue Youth Center. The fence is needed
to prevent stray basketballs from bouncing into traffic at Holt Avenue and Russell Street.
She stated the proposal appears to be compatible with the standards for approval of a
variance subject to conditions.
Discussion ensued regarding the landscaping requirement and placement of the proposed
fence in the rigln-of-way,
DCAB Minutes
08/12/93
(y~.......\
\ ,
\.".....,.'
............
Larry Dowd, City Recreation Facilities Superintendent, responded to questions, stating he
initiates applications for fence permits and variance applications. Regarding the landscaping,
he said the fence is closer to the court than what previously existed and no landscaping is
required. He felt the 72-inch height is needed to keep stray basketballs from bouncing into
traffic with children running after them.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr, Gans moved to grant the
variances as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for
approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land Development Code, more specifically
because, the variances are the minimum necessary to overcome a safety hardship created
by the lot size and the use of the property subject to the following conditions: 1) This
variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicant,
including maps, plans, surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's
request for a variance. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of
the request for a variance regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any
physical structure located on the site, will result in this variance being null and of no effect;
21 landscaping shall be installed in accordance with Sec. 42.26(8) of the Land Development
Code and 3) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (6) months from the
date of this public hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
2. City of Clearwater a variance of 42 inches to allow a fence 72 inches in
height where 30 inches in height is permitted at 1190 Russell Street, See 10-
29-15, M&B 12.02. zoned OS/R (Open Space! Recreation). V 93-49
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail. stating the applicant wishes to
replace an existing fence on property located directly to the north of that in the previous
application. This fence surrounds a football field and the purpose of the fence is to control
stray balls and help regulate collecting admission for the Greenwood Panthers Youth football
association. The request appears to comply with the standards for approval.
Larry Dowd responded to questions, stating the entire length of fence is going to be replaced
along the back side of the property, He said if the proposed fence was set back any further,
it would interfere with the operation of the parking lot. He stated there are 500 to 1,000
spectators on the weekends who would benefit from the additional safety and security the
fence would provide to their children,
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Martin moved to grant the
variance as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for
approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land Development Code, subject to the following
conditions: 1) This variance is based on the application for a variance and documents
submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans, surveys, and other documents submitted
in support of the applicant's request for a variance based upon factors of safety aad security
for tIle site. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the request
for a variance regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure
located on the site, will result in this variance being null and of no effect; 2) landscaping
shall be installed in accordance with See, 42,26(8) of the Land Development Code and 3) the
requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this I)ublic
hearing, The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
DCAB Minutes
2
08/1 2193
,-"'.,
\
[ "
.......~,.
\ ;
,,:t
3. Mark F. Donato & Tammy L. Nelson for variances (1) of 13.04 ft to allow
a structure 11,96 ft from a street right-of-way where 25 ft is required; (2) of
20 ft to allow a minimum lot width of 50 ft where 70 ft is required at 1056
Commodore Street, Bay Terrace & Bay Terrace Addition, Blk A, Lot 5, zoned
RS 8 (Single Family Residential). V 93-50
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail, stating the applicant wishes to
replace a flat roof on an existing single family home with a pitched roof with will be in
alignment with the existing structure.
Mark Donato, owner/applicant, stated he has been patching leaks on his old roof for over a
year and, when it is replaced, would like to extend the garage forward to align with the rest
of the house and the house next door.
Discussion ensued regarding the site plan, required setbacks and whether or not a building
permit is needed for modifying a decorative block wall on the property. Mr. Donato said a
metal building on the property is temporary and will be removed.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Martin moved to grant the
variances as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for
approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land Development Code, more specifically
because, the variances arise from a condition which is unique to the property and not caused
by the owner or applicant subject to the following conditions: 1) This variance is based on
the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps,
plans, surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's request for a
variance. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the request
for a variance regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure
located on the site, will result in this variance being null and of no effect and 2) the requisite
building permit shall be obtained within six {6} months from the date of this public hearing.
The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
4,. City of Clearwater for variances (1) of 2 ft to permit a 6 ft high fence in
setback area adjacent to street to which property is not addressed; (2) of 21
ft to permit two basketball goals to be located 14 ft from a street right-at-way,
rather than the 35 ft setback required at 1900 Gilbert Street, part of Marymont
Sub, lying south of Airport Dr, zoned OS/R (Open Space/Recreation}. V 93~51
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail, stating the applicant wishes to
construct a fence around three sides and add two goals to an existing basketball court. The
fencing is being requested to keep basketballs from the street and to separate the court from
other playground equipment and the parking areas to the east.
Questions were raised regarding the CIty Traffic Engineering Department recommendations
to have fence openings and to vacate Brandon Avenue. It was indicated City Parks and
Recreation department administration was agreeable to putting in fence openings; however,
did not support vacating Brandon Avenue at this time, Regarding the hnrdship, Mr. Dowd
indicated this proposal would allow safe and full use of the property as intended.
DCAB Minutes
3
08/1 2/93
r~~
'-...'
1 ,
\..../
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans moved to grant the
variances as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for
approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the Land Development Code, more specifically
because, the variances arise from a condition which is unique to the property and not caused
by the owner or applicant and is needed for full utilization of the property for its intended
recreational use subject to the following conditions: 1) This variance is based on the
application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans,
surveys, and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's request for a variance,
Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of the request for a
variance regarding the work to be done with regard to the site or any physical structure
located on the site, will result in this variance being null and of no effect; 2) a gate shall be
Installed in the fence facing Brandon Avenue; 3) landscaping shall be installed in accordance
with Sec. 42.26(8) of the Land Development Code; and 4) the requisite building permit shall
be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public hearing. The motion was duly
seconded and carried unanimously.
5. Robert M. Mayer & Patricia A. St. John for a variance of 10.5 ft to permit
a freestanding roof trellis to be located 14.5 ft from a street right-of-way at
304 Magnolia Drive, Harbor Oaks Sub, part of lot 97, and all of lot 99, zoned
RS 6 {Single Family Residential}. V 93-52
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail, stating the applicant wishes to
construct a freestanding roof trellis over an existing pool at an existing single-family
residence. The application appears to support the standards for approval subject to
recommended conditions.
Robert Mayer, the owner/applicant. stated the structure is needed to protect the pool and his
two small children from the intensity of the sun. He stated this is the best type of structure
to enhance the appearance and provide shelter from the sun.
In response to questions, Mr, Mayer stated a tlat-roofed wooden structure would not be
strong enough to keep from caving in.
Concern was expressed the proposed structure is too tall, too close to the street; could pose
a maintenance problem and towers above the landscaping. While it was agreed a sun screen
is needed, this structure was felt to be overpowering. Mr, Mayer stated he has studied this
proposal for years and the architects have come up with this as the best way to screen the
pool from the sun while remaining compatible with the architecture of the rest of the house,
He did not want a birdcage, stating aluminum screening would not enhance the aesthetics
and he does not want to enclose the area.
In response to a question, Mr. Mayer stated the proposed overhead trellis is not wood, but
a fiberglas material for easy maintenance, He said he told his builder he wants the minimum
structure that will look good, be durable and withstand the forces of the wind.
Discussion continued regarding the height, width and design of the proposal.
One letter was received in support of the application,
DCAB Minutes
4
08/1 2/93
: ~ .,," >'1"1" ...:, ."...... "':~"~..." '.;'" ','....:. '.... ',' .....,~>.". I.. " 4'",,~
....-",~
,
Mr. Mayer was advised af his right ta ask far a continuance due to having only three board
members present. He declined the offer I stating he wishes to proceed as soon as possible.
Based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Ms. Martin moved to grant the
variance as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of the standards for
approval as listed in Section 45,24 of the land Development Code, subject to the following
conditions: 1) This variance is based on the application for a variance and documents
submitted by the applicant, including maps, plans, surveys, and other documents submitted
in support of the applicant's request for a variance. Deviation from any of the above
documents submitted in support of the request for a variance regarding th,.:: work to be done
with regard to the site ar any physical structure located on the site, wlll iesult in this variance
being null and of no effect; 2) the proposed roof trellis shall remain unenclobsd; 3) the owner
of the property shall maintain the existing fence and landscaping between the pool and the
property line and 4) the requisite building permit shall be obtained within six (61 months from
the date of this public hearing. The motion was duty seconded and carried unanimously.
6. Starboard Tower Clipper Cove Condo for a variance of 2 ft to allow a 6 ft
high fence where 4 ft in height is permitted within the structural setback from
which the property is not addressed at 400 Island Way, Starboard Tower
Clipper Cove Condominium, zoned RM 28 (Multiple Family Residential). V 93-
54
(
,-,
Senior Planner Glatthorn explained the application in detail, stating the applicant wishes to
replace a deteriorating fence along the north and south perimeters of the swimming pool.
The original fence, which appears to have been poorly maintained, was granted a variance
on March 8, 1979, Staff recommends the new fence be properly maintained,
Bob Wright, resident representing the applicant, stated the new fence, with stuccoed cement ~..
pillars will be of the same design as what previously existed except the wooden fencing wilt
be replaced with plastic, He presented a sketch and outlined the proposal, stating the original
fence was destroyed by storms. Mr. Wright explained the pool area is shared in common
with an adjacent condominium and they have agreed to replace the south fence to match the
other new fencing.
It being understood the adjacent Cutter Cove Townhouses have agreed to the construction
of a similar fence, and based upon the information furnished by the applicant, Mr. Gans
moved to grant the variance as requested because the applicant has substantially met all of
the standards for approval as listed in Section 45.24 of the land Development Code, more
specifically because, the particular physical surroundings and topographical conditions of the
property involved and the strict application of the provisions of this development code would
result in an unnecessary hardship upon the applicant and the variance is the minimum
necessary to overcome any unnecessary hardship subject to the following conditions: 1) This
variance is based on the application for a variance and documents submitted by the applicant,
including maps, plans, surveys. and other documents submitted in support of the applicant's
request for a variance. Deviation from any of the above documents submitted in support of
the request for a variance regarding the work to be donG with regard to the site or any
,
'~,,'
DCAB Minutes
5
08/12/93
('\
physical structure located on the site, will result in this variance being null and of no effect;
2) the fence shall be properly maintained in order to ensure the aesthetic quality of the
surrounding neighborhood and 3) the requisite building permit for the fence along the northern
perimeter of the pool shall be obtained within six (6) months from the date of this public
hearing. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
II. Approval of Minutes of July 22, 1993
Mr, Gans moved to approve the minutes of July 22, 1993, in accordance with copies
submitted to each board member in writing. The motion was duly seconded and carried
, unanimously.
III. Board and Staff Discussion
Discussion ensued regarding thE; roof trellis proposal heard earlier. Concern was expressed
it will look out of place and wlll not be aesthetically pleasing.
A question was raised regarding reading the standard motion format and the meaning of
standard condition 111. Assistant City Attorney Lance suggested the standard condition be
read once at the beginning of the meeting, rather than in each motion. It was indicated
reciting the standards for approval in each motion could become important if a case should
be appealed.
Discussion ensued regarding the King Cole Motel and Surf West, cases recently appealed to
{ ,. the State, Mr. Gans requested a copy of the final order in the Surf West case and discussion
'""-../ ensued, A question was raised whether or not the City Harbormaster used adequate means
of investigating what boat ships were in existence when the zoning standards were set.
A question was raised and discussion ensued regarding what it means when the City vacates
a piece of property.
DCAB Minutes
6
08/1 2/93
Discussion ensued regarding the Development Code Adjustment Board's role in the City
government. It was indicated this is the only board whose decisions are not appealed to the
City Commission, but to the Stnte.
Discussion ensued regarding the procedure for swearing in anyone who will be making
statements of fact. Mr. Lance suggested swearing in at the beginning of every case,
regardless of how many cases they ha\le on the day's agenda.
IV, Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 2:51 p,m.
Chair~ V01
t I
~<